Beware 2012 Third-Party Candidate

When a liberal commentator like Doyle McManus at the latimes.com talks about a possible third-party candidate in the 2012 presidential election, it is time to get out the magnifying glass and look at what he really is saying.

Because this is something that is hanging over us conservatives like the Sword of Damocles – a shill candidate that will draw voters away from the Republican candidate and give the election to Obama.

Democrats have used the tactic many times, most recently in the 2010 Massachusetts governor’s race and in a 2011 special election in western New York state for a US congressional seat where a wealthy liberal Democrat ran as a Tea Party conservative in order to take votes from the Republican. Expect this to increase in coming years as Democrats get desperate.

Of course, third partiers can come back to bite the Democrats too. If Ralph Nader had not been on the Florida ballot in 2000, Al Gore would have been elected president.

But unfortunately for the left, Nader was not a Democrat shill; he took votes from Gore. The liberals would have put up a ‘centrist’ or ‘conservative’ shill to take votes from Bush.

Look at what McManus wrote recently in an op-ed called ‘The third party wild card’:

Americans Elect, a well-funded “virtual third party,” plans to put a centrist presidential candidate on the ballot in all 50 states… Americans Elect is a collection of Republicans, Democrats and independents who say they’re fed up with the polarization that has poisoned American politics. Some of its backers have previously contributed to Obama, Romney or other candidates. Several are fans of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has flirted with the idea of running as a third-party centrist.

This last sentence exposes this group right away. Bloomberg is a rich media leftist (estimated wealth is $10 billion) who wants to control everyone as he has done in New York city with his smoking bans, and his bans on trans-fats in restaurants. But rest assured he would run in a presidential election as a moderate-conservative in order to drain votes from the Republican.

Remember that Bloomberg initially rushed to conjecture that the failed Islamic Times Square car bomber of May 1, 2010 might have been a conservative upset with the health-care bill, i.e., he unwittingly revealed a pathological hatred of the Tea Party.

Bloomie also has supported the Ground Zero mosque. So you know where this guy’s true sentiments lie – with Obama. And he could position himself in 2012 precisely so as to re-elect Obama. Don’t doubt it. He is a very dangerous political chameleon.

Now look at what McManus wrote:

Both Democrats and Republicans in Americans Elect insist that there’s no conspiracy here. They don’t have a preferred candidate, they say, and they’re not launching this effort with a “spoiler” outcome in mind.

What happens then (which candidate is nominated by Americans Elect) depends mostly on the shape of the contest between the Democratic and Republican candidates.

Huh?! This statement really means that Americans Elect is not going to nominate someone based on their qualifications but only on their calculated ability to sway the election. Because they know their candidate cannot win.

McManus writes:

“I’m in this because I think the system is broken, and this is a way to begin fixing it,” said Darry Sragow, a Los Angeles lawyer and veteran of California Democratic politics who is the group’s national political director. “There’s no intention here to spoil anybody’s candidacy.”

So there it is… ‘a veteran of California Democratic politics’ is the group’s national director. California Democrats are the most radical leftists in America.

Need we skeptics say more? This is how liberals always work. They take an organization that is supposed to be non-partisan and they commandeer it and use it for their own purposes just as they have commandeered foundations, the arts, the media, the universities, feminism, black America etc.

You just wait; this group will talk ‘moderate’ but will work to re-elect Obama. And then, within a few short years if it remains cohesive, it will become just a front for the Democrat party, which is the real intention. Because as McManus writes:

That (2012) start is certain to be an interesting experiment no matter what happens. But its real potential will come in 2014 and beyond — if it can stay on the ballot and break the two parties’ oligopoly in congressional elections, where the real problem lies.

So in other words, they are just getting started. And once they are up and running, the group will be taken over by Democrat party operatives and run for the benefit of the Democrat party.

Don’t believe this ‘centrist’ nonsense. These people want Obama re-elected. The real threat they see to America is not the ‘polarization that has poisoned American politics’ as McManus writes, but the mere presence of conservatives in the dialogue. Because to them the national dialogue is liberal. And this group is made up of hardball Democrats like Sragow and McCain-type RepubliCrats.

McManus then writes:

Another is that the group is aiming at the wrong target. Presidential elections aren’t the main source of polarization in American politics; neither Obama nor Romney is an extremist.

Obama is not an extremist? If not, how did $800 billion in the 2009 ‘stimulus’ disappear into thin air? Or how did Obama direct the GM and Chrysler bailouts to the unions in a thoroughly corrupt transaction? Look at how Obama repeatedly is circumventing Congress, handing out favor after favor after favor to select groups, the most recent being college students. Look at his apologies for America and his bowing to foreign leaders. Look at his past association with radicals like Wright and Ayers, and communists like Van Jones working in the White House.

No, no, Obama is no extremist…

Yeah, right. In short, McManus’ whole commentary is biased toward Obama. Expectedly. And just like McManus is posing as an unbiased reporter, this group is posing as a centrist organization and McManus does everything he can to promote that fake image.